Can Donald Trump still be president after being convicted in hush money trial?

Published

1 year ago

May 31, 2024

admin

Donald Trump has become the first former US president to be criminally convicted – but what could the historic verdict mean for his ongoing election campaign?

A jury in New York deliberated for nine-and-a-half hours before unanimously agreeing Trump is guilty on 34 counts of falsifying business records to commit election fraud.

The former president covered up a $130,000 (£102,000) payment to porn star Stormy Daniels as part of a “hush money” scheme to bury stories he thought might hurt his presidential campaign in 2016.

With the hush money verdict in, Sky News takes a look at what could happen to Trump’s quest for reelection now he’s been convicted.

Can Trump still run for president?

Yes. The US Constitution sets out three main requirements for being eligible to become president – and none of them reference being a convicted criminal.

Candidates must have been born in the US, be over 35, and have lived in the US for at least 14 years.

“Nothing prevents him from running for president and being elected, even if he is in jail at the time of the election,” Elizabeth Wydra, president of the progressive Constitutional Accountability Centre, told the LA Times.

That’s despite people with a felony conviction – a crime that can be punished by a year or more in prison – not being allowed to vote in some states.

But what if he were to be elected while in prison?

This is a little more complicated, firstly because it’s not clear if Trump will be sent to prison following the guilty verdict.

The convictions are class E felonies in New York, the lowest tier in the state, with each carrying a maximum sentence of four years.

In choosing the sentence, the judge will have to take into account Trump’s age – he’s now 77 – his lack of previous criminal convictions, and the fact that the case involves a non-violent crime.

Even if the judge, Justice Juan Merchan, opts for a custodial sentence, it’s likely Trump will appeal the guilty verdict – and expect to be on bail until that hearing.

That process could go all the way to the Court of Appeals, and, importantly for Trump, could drag on for months – possibly even past November’s election.

If Trump were to be elected while serving time, the situation becomes more complicated still, with even constitutional experts unsure.

“It’s just guessing,” Erwin Chemerinsky, a constitutional law expert at the University of California, Berkeley, told the New York Times earlier this year.

“We’re so far removed from anything that’s ever happened.”

Could power transfer to the vice president?

In theory, experts say, there is nothing to stop Trump from taking office, even if he were to be behind bars.

There is a provision – the 25th Amendment of the US Constitution – which provides a process to transfer authority to the vice president if the president is “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office”.

However, that would require the approval of the vice president and members of Trump’s cabinet – who will have been hand-picked by him and will no doubt be loyalists.

It is more likely, experts say, that Trump would look to sue for his release or seek a pardon to allow him to govern.

How will the guilty verdict impact the election?

Opinion polls carried out prior to Thursday’s verdict suggested it could pose a significant political danger for Trump.

In an April poll, one in four Republicans said they would not vote for Trump if he was found guilty in a criminal trial.

In the same survey, 60% of independents said they would not vote for Trump if he was convicted of a crime.

What do the experts say about its potential impact?

Whit Ayres, a Republican pollster, said he doubted a quarter of Republicans would actually shun Trump – but he said even a small number being turned off by a guilty verdict could help Joe Biden in a close election.

He said the nature of the New York case, which was brought by a Democratic prosecutor and relies on untested legal strategies, would help Trump and fellow Republicans frame a guilty verdict as a political hit job.

“If I were trying to design a court case that would be easy for Republicans to dismiss as a partisan witch hunt, I would design exactly the case that’s being brought in New York,” he said.

Republican consultant Tricia McLaughlin said she thought a guilty verdict would have a psychological impact on Trump because he hates losing.

It would also likely mean financial resources are diverted to legal bills because he would almost certainly appeal, she added.

Analyst Bill Galston said he didn’t expect a guilty verdict would have a significant impact on the presidential race.

“In the end, this amounts to lying about sex. I think the view probably of the majority of Americans is that everybody lies about sex,” said Mr Galston, who has worked on Democratic presidential campaigns.

Have convicted criminals run for president before?

At least two candidates with criminal convictions have run for president in the past – although neither successfully.

Eugene Debs ran for president from prison in 1920, getting almost a million votes without ever hitting the campaign trail.

In 1992, Lyndon LaRouche also ran from behind bars while serving a 15-year sentence for mail fraud. He received about 26,000 votes.

More trials ahead

This case was the first of four criminal cases against Trump to go to trial, and marked the first time a former president has faced criminal charges.

It is unlikely the remaining three cases will go to trial before the November election.

US

Donald Trump praises Liberian president’s English – the country’s official language

Published

11 hours ago

July 10, 2025

admin

Donald Trump praises Liberian president's English - the country's official language

Donald Trump has praised the Liberian president’s command of English – the West African country’s official language.

The US president reacted with visible surprise to Joseph Boakai’s English-speaking skills during a White House meeting with leaders from the region on Wednesday.

After the Liberian president finished his brief remarks, Mr Trump told him he speaks “such good English” and asked: “Where did you learn to speak so beautifully?”

Mr Trump seemed surprised when Mr Boakai laughed and responded he learned in Liberia.

The US president said: “It’s beautiful English.

“I have people at this table who can’t speak nearly as well.”

Mr Boakai did not tell Mr Trump that English is the official language of Liberia.

The country was founded in 1822 with the aim of relocating freed African slaves and freeborn black citizens from the US.

👉 Follow Trump100 on your podcast app 👈

Mr Trump promised the leaders of Liberia, Senegal, Gabon, Mauritania and Guinea-Bissau a pivot from aid to trade at the surprise meeting.

He described the countries as “all very vibrant places with very valuable land, great minerals, and great oil deposits, and wonderful people”.

Later asked by a reporter if he’ll visit the continent, Mr Trump said, “At some point, I would like to go to Africa.”

But he added that he’d “have to see what the schedule looks like”.

Trump’s predecessor, President Joe Biden, promised to go to Africa in 2023, but only fulfilled the commitment by visiting Angola in December 2024, just weeks before he left office.

US

Gaza permanent ceasefire ‘questionable’, says Israeli government

Published

11 hours ago

July 10, 2025

admin

Gaza permanent ceasefire 'questionable', says Israeli government

The Israeli government believes the chances of achieving a permanent ceasefire in Gaza are “questionable”.

The pessimistic assessment, in a top-level Israeli government briefing given to Sky News, comes as the Israeli Prime Minister prepares to leave Washington DC after a four-day visit which had begun with the expectation of a ceasefire announcement.

Benjamin Netanyahu will leave the US later today with the prospect of even a temporary 60-day ceasefire looking extremely unlikely this week.

Within “a week, two weeks – not a day” is how it was framed in the background briefing late on Wednesday.

Crucially, though, on the chances of the ceasefire lasting beyond 60 days, the framing from the briefing was even less optimistic: “We will begin negotiations on a permanent settlement. But we achieve it? It’s questionable, but Hamas will not be there.”

Sky News has spoken to several Israeli officials at the top level of the government. None will be drawn on any of the details of the negotiations over concerns that public disclosure could jeopardise their chances of success.

But I have been given a very clear understanding of Mr Netanyahu’s thinking.

The Israeli position is that a permanent ceasefire (beyond the initial 60 days, which itself is yet to be agreed) is only possible if Hamas lays down its arms. “If they don’t, we’ll proceed [with the war],” said a source.

The major sticking point in the talks between Hamas and Israel is the status of the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) inside Gaza during the 60-day ceasefire and beyond, should it last longer.

The latest Israeli proposal, passed to Hamas last week, included a map showing the proposed IDF presence inside Gaza during the ceasefire.

This was rejected by Hamas and by Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, who reportedly told the Israelis that the redeployment map “looks like a Smotrich plan”, a reference to the extreme-right Israeli finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich.

My briefing of Mr Netanyahu’s position is that he has not shifted in terms of Israel’s central stated war aims. The return of the hostages and eliminating Hamas are the key objectives.

But in a hint of how hard it will be to reconcile the differences, it was clear from my briefing that no permanent ceasefire is possible in the Israeli government’s view without the complete removal of Hamas as a political and military entity.

Hamas is not likely to negotiate its way to oblivion.

On the status of the Israeli military inside Gaza, a senior Israeli official told Sky News: “We would want IDF in every square metre of Gaza, and then hand it over to someone.”

It was clear to me that Mr Netanyahu wants his stated position to be that his government has no territorial ambition for Gaza.

One quote to come from my briefing, which I am only able to attribute to a senior Israeli official, says: “[We] don’t want to govern Gaza… don’t want to govern, but the first thing is, you have to defeat Hamas.”

Another clear indication of Mr Netanyahu’s position – a quote from the briefing, attributable only to a senior Israeli official: “You cannot have victory if you don’t clear out all the fighting forces.

“You have to go into every square inch unless you are not serious about victory. I am. We are going to defeat them. Those who do not disarm will die. Those who disarm will have a life.”

On the future of Gaza, it’s clear from my briefings that Mr Netanyahu continues to rule out the possibility of a two-state solution “for the foreseeable future”.

The Israeli government assessment is that the Palestinians are not going to have a state “as long as they cling to that idea of destroying our state”.

On the most controversial aspect of the Gaza conflict – the movement of the population – the briefing revealed that Mr Netanyahu’s view is that 60% of Palestinians would “choose to leave” but that Israel would allow them to return once Hamas had been eliminated.

“It’s not forcible eviction, it’s not permanent eviction,” a senior Israeli official said.

Critics of Israel’s war in Gaza say that any removal of Palestinians from Gaza, even if given the appearance of being “voluntary”, is in fact anything but, because the strip has been so comprehensively flattened.

Reacting to Israeli Defence Minister Katz’s recent statement revealing a plan to move Palestinians into a “humanitarian city” in southern Gaza, and not let them out of that area, the official wouldn’t be drawn, except to say: “As a permanent arrangement? Of course not.”

US

Gaza permanent ceasefire ‘questionable’, says senior Israeli official

Published

14 hours ago

July 10, 2025

admin

A senior Israeli official has issued a less-than-optimistic assessment of the permanency of any ceasefire in Gaza.

Speaking in Washington on condition of anonymity, the senior official said that a 60-day ceasefire “might” be possible within “a week, two weeks – not a day”.

But on the chances of the ceasefire lasting beyond 60 days, the official said: “We will begin negotiations on a permanent settlement.

“But we achieve it? It’s questionable, but Hamas will not be there.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is due to conclude a four-day visit to Washington later today.

There had been hope that a ceasefire could be announced during the trip. US President Donald Trump has repeatedly stated that it’s close.

Speaking at a briefing for a number of reporters, the Israeli official would not be drawn on any of the details of the negotiations over concerns that public disclosure could jeopardise their chances of success.

The major sticking point in the talks between Hamas and Israel is the status of the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) inside Gaza during the 60-day ceasefire and beyond, should it last longer.

The latest Israeli proposal, passed to Hamas last week, included a map showing the proposed IDF presence inside Gaza during the ceasefire.

The official repeated Israel’s central stated war aims of getting the hostages back and eliminating Hamas. But in a hint of how hard it will be to reconcile the differences, the official was clear that no permanent ceasefire would be possible without the complete removal of Hamas.

“We will offer them a permanent ceasefire,” he told Sky News. “If they agree. Fine. It’s over.

“They lay down their arms, and we proceed [with the ceasefire]. If they don’t, we’ll proceed [with the war].”

On the status of the Israeli military inside Gaza, the official said: “We would want IDF in every square meter of Gaza, and then hand it over to someone…”

He added: “[We] don’t want to govern Gaza… don’t want to govern, but the first thing is, you have to defeat Hamas…”

The official said the Israeli government had “no territorial designs for Gaza”.

“But [we] don’t want Hamas there,” he continued. “You have to finish the job… victory over Hamas. You cannot have victory if you don’t clear out all the fighting forces.

“You have to go into every square inch unless you are not serious about victory. I am. We are going to defeat them. Those who do not disarm will die. Those who disarm will have a life.”

On the future of Gaza, the official ruled out the possibility of a two-state solution “for the foreseeable future”.

“They are not going to have a state in the foreseeable future as long as they cling to that idea of destroying our state. It doesn’t make a difference if they are the Palestinian Authority or Hamas, it’s just a difference of tactics.”

On the most controversial aspect of the Gaza conflict – the movement of the population – the official predicted that 60% of Palestinians would “choose to leave”.

But he claimed that Israel would allow them to return once Hamas had been eliminated, adding: “It’s not forcible eviction, it’s not permanent eviction.”

Critics of Israel’s war in Gaza say that any removal of Palestinians from Gaza, even if given the appearance of being “voluntary,” is in fact anything but, because the strip has been so comprehensively flattened.